If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

View Poll Results: Do you sign Michael Bourn, or do you keep the 11th pick in the draft

I'm pretty torn, but I would rather keep the pick. The Mets won't be good this year. At best the returns on this investment would be in 2014 and 2015, the former only if we spend next off-season. So really, I think if that pick is a good college bat, I'd rather have the young protected player for 2015 and beyond than one year of Bourn contributing to a winning team in 2015. Whether our pick pans out is the only argument you can use as Bourn is a proven player. I'm all for adding parts every year, but I would not give up the pick for him.

Pittsburgh/Appel really screwed us on this one. If our pick was top 10 protected, I would definitely say go after Bourn as we would have extra money to sign someone using Stanky's bonus (as other posters have pointed out) to recoup the lost 2nd round pick for Bourn.

So in brief, no if we have to give up a 1st round pick, and yes, if our pick were top 10 protected.

Bourne is not worth the pick...I kind of like his speed and CF ability, but the Mets don't need another Lefty hitting OFer...plus, over the past 3 seasons, he's put up a .279 average and .722 OPS; that's better than what we have but for a #11 draft pick? not good enough for an OFer...

I don't think it's a forgone conclusion that Bourn will sign a monster deal or a 1 year deal. For one, if he doesn't get his big contract now, after what was a huge year for the guy, what are the odds he hits the jackpot a year from now?

Boras has done crazier things, but I think Bourn will end up getting a 3, maybe 4 year deal and taking it. Moreover, as Dugmet said, why would any team give up a 1st round pick for 1 year of Bourn? Unless a top 10 pick team signs him for 1 year, that doesn't make a lot of sense.

Bourn may not be a player to put you over the top, if that's the criteria, but he's a quality major league player at a premium defensive position - a position the Mets are desperate to fill.

I think it's a closer call than some other people think. I doubt it happens, but the team needs to invest in a quality outfielder in the next year - whoever it may be.

I was advocating for Bourn and or Delmon Young if the Mets were going to try and be competitive in 2013. I think Young does not cost us the #11 pick...correct me if I'm wrong. While Young is not the greatest fielder he sure can hit. And he is 28 and looks like he would receive no more than the new normal of $13m for three years plus options. We need a solid #5 hitter as much as a speedy leadoff hitter. Young could fill that bill nicely. Let him play RF now and some day when Duda is a DH move Yojng to LF.

I was advocating for Bourn and or Delmon Young if the Mets were going to try and be competitive in 2013. I think Young does not cost us the #11 pick...correct me if I'm wrong. While Young is not the greatest fielder he sure can hit. And he is 28 and looks like he would receive no more than the new normal of $13m for three years plus options. We need a solid #5 hitter as much as a speedy leadoff hitter. Young could fill that bill nicely. Let him play RF now and some day when Duda is a DH move Yojng to LF.

You're right, Delmon Young will not cost us the 11th pick.... Mostly because he ****ing sucks.

He sure can hit? He hit .267/.296/.411 with a whopping -0.7 WAR. He is absolutely trash, I'd much rather bring back Hairston than bring in this loser.